Why did Bioware write the pre-Extended Cut ending for Mass Effect 3 the way they did?

[Robot Number V]

Honestly, my question is "Why aren't people complaining about the whole final third of the game?"

I mean, the Thessia mission is about half as long as the others, and the whole "Asari hiding Prothean tech" thing felt really rushed. Plus, the final mission plays like something out of....I'll say it....Call of Duty. I mean, it's just rubble. Really doesn't hold a candle to the Closed Citadel of ME1 or the Collector Base of ME2. They could've had it be covered in Reaper tech or SOMETHING to make more interesting but...They didn't.

Personally, I think the reason for it all is that they were just rushed. Plain and simple. Although I can't even fathom why anyone would think the ending (even WITH the DLC) was a good idea. But we've been over this already, haven't we?

 

[Zaik]

I think they thought it was good.

The levels of butthurt on display after they "found out" it wasn't are a little too high for it to have been anything else.

With their fans eating their shit straight out of the toilet with DA:O, I assume they got the mistaken impression that they were actually good at writing or something. Hopefully that got cleared up.

 

[Mike the Bard]

Writers block. Writers block beyond anything we can comprehend.

there are some cool ideas mixed in with the ending. just everything else is either not up to par or has massive plot holes in it. so my guess is that they were slowly working there way through the writers block by writing down anything that comes to mind (which is how you solve writers block). Managed to get some cool ideas down on paper. Somebody walked in on them and said, "We don't have time for this, we'll take what you got and roll with it."

 

[Legion]

I think they wanted to make the ending profound and moving, two things which are often associated tragedies. The problem was, they hadn't built the proper foundation for such an ending, so it just turned out like shit. It's an instance of authors imposing what they want to happen on a story rather than letting the story lead them to the ending it should logically have. Had they figured out the ending early in the development cycle of the series, maybe a tragic ending would have worked since they could have built a story that would demand such an ending. But they didn't. They threw together the ending in the final months of development on the final game. And as such, it was completely incongruous with the story leading up to it.

Very well said.

The ending was only poor because of how jarring and unfitting it was really. Had the three games lead up to that point via hints, or story arcs leading towards that kind of conclusion, then perhaps it'd have worked out.

But like the person I quoted said, they didn't create a story for which the ending worked with, and as such it stuck out as something wrong.

Honestly, my question is "Why aren't people complaining about the whole final third of the game?"

I think most of it is down to how poorly the ending beats everything else. Just looking at it makes everything else (including the other bad parts) seem so much better in comparison.

 

[TheOneBearded]

Honestly, my question is "Why aren't people complaining about the whole final third of the game?"

I mean, the Thessia mission is about half as long as the others, and the whole "Asari hiding Prothean tech" thing felt really rushed. Plus, the final mission plays like something out of....I'll say it....Call of Duty. I mean, it's just rubble. Really doesn't hold a candle to the Closed Citadel of ME1 or the Collector Base of ME2. They could've had it be covered in Reaper tech or SOMETHING to make more interesting but...They didn't.

Personally, I think the reason for it all is that they were just rushed. Plain and simple. Although I can't even fathom why anyone would think the ending (even WITH the DLC) was a good idea. But we've been over this already, haven't we?

This is exactly what I was thinking! For some reason, everything past Tuchunka just doesn't feel...right - felt a bit hollow. The Thessia mission wasn't that emotional. I played the game twice and still couldn't see why everyone (including my Renegade Shepard) was so disappointed over losing the planet. There are multiple planets that have been already lost to the Reapers - the homeworlds of the Elcor, Batarians, and the Hanar to name a few, yet no one gives a rat's ass about them as much as Thessia.

Although, I have to admit, the ending mission was pretty cool. It is still the worst of the three, but that last stand while you prime the missiles as that song comes up got my heart pumping pretty good.

 

[TheOneBearded]

The ending was only poor because of how jarring and unfitting it was really. Had the three games lead up to that point via hints, or story arcs leading towards that kind of conclusion, then perhaps it'd have worked out.

Which is exactly why I thought they would do an Indoc. Theory ending for the Ext. Cut. Throughout the three games, they gave out subtle hints like Shepard's odd dreams and how he has come into contact with Reaper tech so many times yet hasn't become at least a little indoctrinated. Whether these hints were on purpose or not we'll never know.

I got to say, they really tried to make the worst ending of all time for this game. To bad, Borderlands still holds the crown.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Honestly, my question is "Why aren't people complaining about the whole final third of the game?"

I mean, the Thessia mission is about half as long as the others, and the whole "Asari hiding Prothean tech" thing felt really rushed. Plus, the final mission plays like something out of....I'll say it....Call of Duty. I mean, it's just rubble. Really doesn't hold a candle to the Closed Citadel of ME1 or the Collector Base of ME2. They could've had it be covered in Reaper tech or SOMETHING to make more interesting but...They didn't.

I think at that point most of us were assuming it was all going to culminate into something great and satisfying...

 

[ShadowsofHope]

Because Casey Hudson and Mac Walters wouldn't know to how to write a decent ending to a trilogy like Mass Effect if God himself gave them the script in the form of another Bible.

..That, and a ton of ego. And probably drugs.

 

[Robot Number V]

Honestly, my question is "Why aren't people complaining about the whole final third of the game?"

I mean, the Thessia mission is about half as long as the others, and the whole "Asari hiding Prothean tech" thing felt really rushed. Plus, the final mission plays like something out of....I'll say it....Call of Duty. I mean, it's just rubble. Really doesn't hold a candle to the Closed Citadel of ME1 or the Collector Base of ME2. They could've had it be covered in Reaper tech or SOMETHING to make more interesting but...They didn't.

Personally, I think the reason for it all is that they were just rushed. Plain and simple. Although I can't even fathom why anyone would think the ending (even WITH the DLC) was a good idea. But we've been over this already, haven't we?

This is exactly what I was thinking! For some reason, everything past Tuchunka just doesn't feel...right - felt a bit hollow. The Thessia mission wasn't that emotional. I played the game twice and still couldn't see why everyone (including my Renegade Shepard) was so disappointed over losing the planet. There are multiple planets that have been already lost to the Reapers - the homeworlds of the Elcor, Batarians, and the Hanar to name a few, yet no one gives a rat's ass about them as much as Thessia.

Although, I have to admit, the ending mission was pretty cool. It is still the worst of the three, but that last stand while you prime the missiles as that song comes up got my heart pumping pretty good.

That's true, it's pretty impossible to fire that last missile in a way that ISN'T extremely epic, and the sprint for the Teleportation Spire or whatever is pretty damn cool as well.

 

[TheOneBearded]

That's true, it's pretty impossible to fire that last missile in a way that ISN'T extremely epic, and the sprint for the Teleportation Spire or whatever is pretty damn cool as well.

Quick question: Did they ever explain why there was a Conduit 2.0 on Earth? I am not sure if I was paying enough attention.

 

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

Because they're incompetent. It's as simple as that. I knew the game would not be as good as the previous two games as soon as I discovered that Drew Karpyshyn wasn't involved AT ALL.

 

[Robot Number V]

That's true, it's pretty impossible to fire that last missile in a way that ISN'T extremely epic, and the sprint for the Teleportation Spire or whatever is pretty damn cool as well.

Quick question: Did they ever explain why there was a Conduit 2.0 on Earth? I am not sure if I was paying enough attention.

I believe the Reapers were using it to transport livestock (us) up to the Citadel to be converted into Reaper Mush. Unless you mean "Where did it come from", in which case...Hmm. I just assumed they brought it with them from Dark Space. It never really gets formally addressed, now that I'm thinking about it.

 

[Legion]

The ending was only poor because of how jarring and unfitting it was really. Had the three games lead up to that point via hints, or story arcs leading towards that kind of conclusion, then perhaps it'd have worked out.

Which is exactly why I thought they would do an Indoc. Theory ending for the Ext. Cut. Throughout the three games, they gave out subtle hints like Shepard's odd dreams and how he has come into contact with Reaper tech so many times yet hasn't become at least a little indoctrinated. Whether these hints were on purpose or not we'll never know.

I got to say, they really tried to make the worst ending of all time for this game. To bad, Borderlands still holds the crown.

Indeed. Don't get me wrong, the indoctrination theory was not perfect, but it was a lot more reasonable conclusion to draw than what actually happened.

As for Borderlands, I agree that it has the worst ending in itself, but the difference between the two games is that Borderlands was never really about the story, whereas Mass Effect was almost entirely about it.

That is, if you took away all pretence of a plot Borderlands wouldn't have changed much, but the same thing couldn't have been said about ME3.

 

[Erttheking]

Because ARTISTIC INTEGRITY and LOTS AND LOTS OF SPECULATION FOR EVERYONE!

Yeah I'm still bitter, what of it? And I think I might blow my fucking top if anyone calls me "butthurt" or "entitled"

 

[anthony87]

Because ARTISTIC INTEGRITY and LOTS AND LOTS OF SPECULATION FOR EVERYONE!

Yeah I'm still bitter, what of it? And I think I might blow my fucking top if anyone calls me "butthurt" or "entitled"

Well according to a couple of people in this thread, you, I and many others like us were apparently just too stupid to understand the ending properly so Bioware had to dumb it down. But hey, that's better than "butthurt" or "entitled" right?

 

[Erttheking]

Because ARTISTIC INTEGRITY and LOTS AND LOTS OF SPECULATION FOR EVERYONE!

Yeah I'm still bitter, what of it? And I think I might blow my fucking top if anyone calls me "butthurt" or "entitled"

Well according to a couple of people in this thread, you, I and many others like us were apparently just too stupid to understand the ending properly so Bioware had to dumb it down. But hey, that's better than "butthurt" or "entitled" right?

...from your perspective maybe, from mine, I kinda want to punch my wall right now. I'm too stupid to understand the DEEP SYMBOLISM behind the fucking little 2001 a Space Odyssey rip off!? REALLY!? It's not symbolism, It's fucking lazy writing, pure and simple...I should stop now before I say something that'll get me banned.

 

[Callate]

I think people were expecting a tree (start narrow, broaden out) and got an onion (start narrow, broaden out, collapse to narrow again). I think people were also expecting an ending that was decisive, like most of the rest of the game, and were disappointed to get something reactive.

My suspicion is that it's largely a matter of a reactive/onion ending being far easier to put together than a decisive/tree ending, and that the decisions regarding the ending were made at a high level by a smaller team on an excessively tight deadline, rather than made with a larger consensus with a greater period of time to work things out (as suggested by what many see as various internal inconsistencies and loose ends). That decisions on the ending probably were made from on high would explain why Bioware was so quick to defend the original ending and balked on any suggestions there might be something wrong with it.

 

[anthony87]

Because ARTISTIC INTEGRITY and LOTS AND LOTS OF SPECULATION FOR EVERYONE!

Yeah I'm still bitter, what of it? And I think I might blow my fucking top if anyone calls me "butthurt" or "entitled"

Well according to a couple of people in this thread, you, I and many others like us were apparently just too stupid to understand the ending properly so Bioware had to dumb it down. But hey, that's better than "butthurt" or "entitled" right?

...from your perspective maybe, from mine, I kinda want to punch my wall right now. I'm too stupid to understand the DEEP SYMBOLISM behind the fucking little 2001 a Space Odyssey rip off!? REALLY!? It's not symbolism, It's fucking lazy writing, pure and simple...I should stop now before I say something that'll get me banned.

Hey you're preaching to the choir here man. The ending was a piece of shit as far as I'm concerned. If people want to delude themselves into thinking it was this deep, insightful thing with tons of meaning then more power to them.

 

[kommando367]

Didn't they say that they made the ending just to get people talking about it? Given that people haven't shut up about it since, I'd say they've accomplished that extremely fucking well.